Resumed from an earlier stage of the sitting. The Deputy Chair of Committees (Hon Dr Steve Thomas) in the chair; Hon Sue Ellery (Leader of the House) in charge of the bill.

Comments and speeches from various members

Clause 44: Disclosure of material personal interests —

Hon ALISON XAMON: As I indicated in my previous contribution, because the previous new clause has been agreed to by the chamber and is part of the package, I will not be proceeding with the amendment standing in my name.

Comments and speeches from various members

Amendment put and passed.

Comments and speeches from various members

Clause 72: Review of Act —

Hon ALISON XAMON: I want to, hopefully, expedite this matter by referring to not only the proposed amendments standing in my name, but also the dualling clause that has been proposed by the government, because I think it will help us to have that discussion all at once. Effectively, the only difference between what the government has proposed—which is still an improvement on the current review clause within the bill as it stands before us—and my proposal is my proposed new clause 72(3), which seeks to prescribe particular elements of the review that the Greens would like to see undertaken within the overall review process. I note that the way I have proposed to word that specifies that it is not intended to limit any of the review processes within proposed subclause (1), but I want some specifics to be addressed. From speaking behind the Chair, it is my understanding that part of the government concern about prescribing specifics that need to be part of the review is that they may be interpreted in a future review process as somehow limiting the scope of that review. Respectfully, I have a different view. I think the subclause is worded in a way that makes it clear that it is not intended to limit at all, but is intended to ensure that specific issues are going to be addressed.

The first question I have for the minister, before I deal with the issues around my proposed new clause 72(3), is whether the government’s concern is as I have just described, or whether I have misunderstood.

Hon SUE ELLERY: There are a couple of reasons why the government does not support the review provisions set out in proposed new clause 72 in the name of Hon Alison Xamon.


Hon ALISON XAMON: That was very helpful.

Clause put and negatived.

New clause 72 —

Hon ALISON XAMON: I thank the minister for her response. I certainly am persuaded by the comments that she made about proposed subclause 3(c), and she is indeed right, that at the time this particular amendment had been proposed, there was great uncertainty about whether this legislation was likely to impact on environmental assessments. I think the chamber has been fully satisfied that in no way is this legislation able or intended to override our ordinary environmental assessment processes. As such, I heartily concur that that makes this provision completely redundant and, if anything, unhelpful. As such, I will not be moving the amendment standing in my name, but I would like to ask some questions of the minister please, if I may.

I want to confirm that it is likely that a review will incorporate the extent to which the objectives of the act have been achieved. Can the minister please confirm that that is likely to be incorporated within the review?

Hon SUE ELLERY: Yes, I can confirm that.

Hon ALISON XAMON: I thank the minister. Can the minister confirm that a review is likely to also examine the degree to which the act has promoted transparency and public accountability in infrastructure planning and coordination?

Comments by Hon SUE ELLERY:

Hon ALISON XAMON: Thank you, minister, that is helpful, because I understand that one of the aims of this bill is to make sure that we have some more transparency around how these decisions are made.

Finally, I would like confirmation of whether it is likely that any future review will also include the adequacy of the provisions of the act that are dealing with the disclosure of material or financial personal interests of the board, the committee members and the CEO?

Comments by Hon SUE ELLERY:

New clause put and passed.

Clauses 73 to 76 put and passed.

Postponed clause 10: Annual work programme —

Resumed from an earlier stage of the sitting on the amendment moved by Hon Peter Collier.

Hon SUE ELLERY: I move the amendments standing in my name, at 15/10 and 16/10 of supplementary notice paper 118, issue 5 —

Page 9, line 19 — To delete “may” and substitute —


Page 9, after line 20 — To insert —

(6) Infrastructure WA may remove from an annual work programme any information that it considers to be confidential or otherwise not suitable to be made publicly available, prior to making the programme publicly available.

Comments and speeches from various members

Hon ALISON XAMON: I appreciate being able to deal with them as a suite of amendments; it makes it much more efficient. I have a couple of questions. Regarding the amendment proposed by the minister, can the minister confirm whether it is likely that the confidential information, which is going to be removed, will still be able to go through the FOI processes?

Hon SUE ELLERY: The answer is yes. There is nothing in the amendment before the chamber now that diminishes the commitments I made earlier about the coverage of the freedom of information legislation.

Hon ALISON XAMON: Is it likely to be the case that there will be an indicator that information has been removed or will people have to simply speculate on the absence of information? Will it, for example, attach a note or something to it, which will indicate that that information is not there?

Comments and speeches from various members

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Comments and speeches from various members

Progress reported and leave granted to sit again, pursuant to standing orders.


Portfolio Category: 
Parliamentary Type: